Many cul­tures con­sid­er the human heart to be the seat of wis­dom. Now sci­en­tists are find­ing some evi­dence for this, though the real­i­ty may be more com­pli­cat­ed than it seems.

Pre­vi­ous research has sug­gest­ed that high­er heart rate vari­abil­i­ty (HRV)—the vari­abil­i­ty in the time between our heart­beats, which is a mea­sure of heart health—is asso­ci­at­ed with bet­ter cog­ni­tive and emo­tion­al func­tion­ing. For exam­ple, high­er HRV has been linked to bet­ter work­ing mem­o­ry and atten­tion, high­er lev­els of empa­thy and social func­tion­ing, and bet­ter emo­tion­al self-con­trol. Could heart rate vari­abil­i­ty be linked to bet­ter moral judg­ments, as well?

To mea­sure wis­dom, 186 par­tic­i­pants were asked to select a social or polit­i­cal issue cur­rent­ly being debat­ed in Aus­tralia that they felt par­tic­u­lar­ly strong­ly about—such as cli­mate change, unem­ploy­ment, tax­es, etc. Then they were asked to dis­cuss their insights into the issue and how they thought it might play out over time using one of two pos­si­ble view­points: 1) a “self-immersed” or sub­jec­tive, more per­son­al per­spec­tive, using first-per­son pro­nouns like “I” or “me” when pos­si­ble; or 2) a “self-dis­tanced” or more objec­tive, third-per­son per­spec­tive, using pro­nouns like “he” or “she” when pos­si­ble.

The researchers want­ed to see if direct­ing peo­ple to take the per­spec­tive of oth­ers (ver­sus think­ing in a more ego­cen­tric way) might play a role in wise rea­son­ing, and how that inter­act­ed with HRV. Past stud­ies had found that wis­dom might not arise sim­ply from high­er lev­els of cog­ni­tive func­tion­ing (which is linked to HRV); a self-dis­tanced per­spec­tive might also be need­ed to facil­i­tate insight.

Observers blind to the exper­i­ment cod­ed the par­tic­i­pants’ dis­cus­sions, look­ing for evi­dence of wisdom—defined as a recog­ni­tion of one’s lim­its of knowl­edge, the pos­si­bil­i­ty of change, and oth­ers’ per­spec­tives, and an attempt to inte­grate these dif­fer­ent points of view.

After­wards, the par­tic­i­pants were asked to make judg­ments about a fic­ti­tious per­son who engaged in neu­tral or moral­ly ambigu­ous activ­i­ties, such as return­ing (or not) a found wal­let, or keep­ing change (or not) when a room­mate gave them mon­ey to buy piz­za. Observers rat­ed these judg­ments for bias based on whether par­tic­i­pants con­sid­ered both dis­po­si­tion­al fac­tors and sit­u­a­tion­al fac­tors in mak­ing their judg­ments, or if they relied only on one or the oth­er. For exam­ple, par­tic­i­pants would be con­sid­ered biased if they said that keep­ing a wal­let sig­ni­fied that the per­son was dis­hon­est, peri­od (rely­ing on dis­po­si­tion­al expla­na­tions alone), with­out con­sid­er­ing the pos­si­bil­i­ty that circumstance—e.g., the per­son was poor and need­ed the money—might have played a role.

Analy­ses showed that hav­ing high HRV was con­nect­ed to wis­dom, but only if indi­vid­u­als had been instruct­ed to take a self-dis­tanced per­spec­tive. Par­tic­i­pants with high rest­ing HRV (record­ed before and after the exper­i­ments) who were assigned to the “self-dis­tanced” per­spec­tive were sig­nif­i­cant­ly more like­ly to dis­play wise rea­son­ing and less biased judg­ments than those with high HRV assigned to the “self-immersed” per­spec­tive, while those with low HRV did not seem to rea­son or judge dif­fer­ent­ly based on their assigned per­spec­tive.

This sug­gests to Gross­mann that hav­ing high HRV is not enough to improve one’s moral rea­son­ing or to pre­vent bias, even if it has been tied to bet­ter think­ing and emo­tion­al reg­u­la­tion in past research.

“The effi­cient pro­cess­ing of infor­ma­tion or a lot of pre­frontal cor­tex activ­i­ty alone does not nec­es­sar­i­ly make you wis­er. You also need to step beyond your own imme­di­ate self-inter­est for that,” he says. “So not every­one that has high­er heart rate vari­abil­i­ty will sud­den­ly be a wise per­son.”

Gross­mann believes that the cur­rent study builds on some of his pri­or research in which he found impor­tant dif­fer­ences between intel­li­gence, cog­ni­tive activ­i­ty, and wis­dom. In pre­vi­ous stud­ies, he’d found that intel­li­gence didn’t seem to impact one’s well-being, where­as wise rea­son­ing seems to be asso­ci­at­ed with var­i­ous mark­ers of indi­vid­ual well-being and hap­pi­ness. This sug­gests that wis­dom and intel­li­gence are sep­a­rate con­structs.

“Wise rea­son­ing is only weak­ly relat­ed to gen­er­al cog­ni­tive abil­i­ties,” he says.

Though HRV may play a role in wis­dom, Gross­man thinks that there isn’t a lot one can do to change it—it’s more a mat­ter of indi­vid­ual dif­fer­ences. But, he says, we may want to con­sid­er train­ing peo­ple in impar­tial, third-per­son per­spec­tive tak­ing to help them be wis­er in life, whether they have high HRV or not. He and his team are involved in a num­ber of projects aimed at help­ing oth­ers to be more objective—in social, polit­i­cal, and inter­group con­flict situations—and even­tu­al­ly pro­duc­ing more long-last­ing changes.

“I don’t know exact­ly what the nuances of this inter­ven­tion would be, but I hope to tell you in a year,” he says.

— Jill Sut­tie, Psy.D., isGreater Good‘s book review edi­tor and a fre­quent con­trib­u­tor to the mag­a­zine. Based at UC-Berke­ley, Greater Good high­lights ground break­ing sci­en­tific research into the roots of com­pas­sion and altru­ism.

Con­clu­sion: Though wis­dom has been long viewed as too ethe­re­al to be a sub­ject of a tan­gi­ble empir­i­cal inquiry, in the last 25 years researchers have estab­lished sev­er­al psy­cho­log­i­cal com­po­nents of wise judg­ment (Staudinger and Glück, 2011). Recent­ly, neu­ro­sci­en­tists have pro­posed that to under­stand indi­vid­ual dif­fer­ences in wis­dom one also ought to con­sid­er aspects of human phys­i­ol­o­gy (Meeks and Jeste, 2009). The present arti­cle does exact­ly that, focus­ing on HRV. Our research sug­gests that wis­dom-relat­ed judg­ment is not exclu­sive­ly a func­tion of the body or the mind. Rather, both greater heart-rate-vari­abil­i­ty and an ego-decen­tered mind are required for a wis­er, less biased judg­ment.

About SharpBrains

As seen in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, BBC News, CNN, Reuters and more, SharpBrains is an independent market research firm tracking health and performance applications of brain science.